[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data
marc.gemis at gmail.com
Thu May 15 07:01:09 UTC 2014
Let me first introduce myself, I'm a Belgian mapper that has been lurking
for a few months on this mailing list. The reason is that I want to learn
how other communities work and which problems they have and how they solve
Now back to the topic: in Belgium it's quite common to have streets with
two names, at least when they are on the border of two villages. The
Belgian community decided to map this as follows:
name = name1 - name2
name:left = name1
name:right = name2
An example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207455046
What are your thoughts about this ?
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:07 PM, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com> wrote:
> There are at least two major streets in the middle of Nottingham<http://osm.org/go/eu8Y~fqF2?layers=N>like this: logically the street does not have a name, the sides of the
> street have names:
> - North of the Council House, the S side is Smith Row, the N side is
> Long Row
> - South of the Council House, the S side is Poultry, the N side
> Cheapside (originally Rotten Row)
> These names originate as locations in the market square, as can be seen by
> other survivals such as Beastmarket Hill. Where the square is now an open
> plaza the name of the rows of buildings have been transferred to the
> thoroughfare. The addresses on Cheapside are even more complex because the
> shops also have entrances in Exchange Arcade and are let as units of this
> shopping arcade. The Austin Reed shop appears to have at least 4 addresses
> from the Royal Mail, OS, Nottingham council & Austin Reed website: all in
> all a mess.
> Other places where this occurs include: Sherwin Road/Castle Boulevard<http://osm.org/go/eu8Y2Tvhr?layers=N>,
> where the W end of Sherwin Road has houses with Castle Boulevard addresses
> on the S side. In this case I resolved it by tagging the footpath with the
> Caste Boulevard name. This discrepancy arose because the two roads were
> merged when the roundabout was built in the 1920s.
> I recently noticed a case where the Land Registry data for a small new
> build terrace had been resolved by using the name of the terrace as a
> building name. Fail. In some towns (Bangor, N. Wales, comes to mind) many
> houses were built as named terraces with numbers within the terrace.
> Although Bangor has been relatively recently house-numbered a simple
> inspection of addresses painted on rubbish bins suggests that the original
> addresses are still in use.
> Broadly speaking we should try and do this better than the OS Open Data
> because it does happen fairly frequently. name:left and name:right can be
> used even if no-one consumes them at present. It is useful to try and map
> addresses in such cases, and these are the one case where I am happy to use
> the associatedStreet relation. This at least enables the correct grouping
> of entities for the 'street'.
> Perhaps the challenge is twofold:
> - Persuading people that streets with addresses might not be named.
> (The Royal Mail seems generally to adopt a Procrustean solution to force
> everything to fit PAF).
> - Working out how to consume such data (mainly for rendering).
> On 14 May 2014 10:07, Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com>wrote:
>> There's one like that in Oxford (for about 30 metres) - street addresses
>> different on the two sides. For the moment it has name="St Clements
>> Street", alt_name="London Place", and a separate footway with name="London
>> Place" (plus a name:note).
>> So my suggestion - draw separate footways, and give them names. Use
>> name/alt_name on the road, or name = "one name / other name" if both seem
>> equally valid.
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Steven Horner <steven at stevenhorner.com>wrote:
>>> It's interesting and highlights a few problems local to me, some I had
>>> buried my head in the sand temporarily because I don't know how to fix them
>>> correctly. My biggest problem when tagging roads is what to name a road
>>> when either side of the road is a different street. For instance the
>>> analysis highlights "Myrtle Grove" as missing here:
>>> Myrtle grove is the South side of the road labeled Chestnut Grove and
>>> continues around to where the Road is labeled Elm Gardens. Almost all of
>>> the streets in the estate are like this, where it is very misleading
>>> because opposite sides of the road is a different named street. How should
>>> this be mapped, I have steered clear of fixing it because I couldn't find
>>> any guidance on how it should be labeled and technically is it even wrong.
>>> The actual building footprints I have added the correct addresses to.
>>> I use various OS products in my day job and interestingly OSM labels the
>>> streets exactly the same as Vectormap Local does, anyone looking at either
>>> OS or OSM maps would not be able to find Myrtle Grove. Another street where
>>> I have always though was labeled wrong in the village is Roddymoor Road,
>>> there is no street sign and I have near heard anyone refer to it as this.
>>> The street on part of this road is not labeled (buildings are) it is East
>>> Terrace and that's how anyone describing it or looking at signs would
>>> describe it. Again OS do this the same which is probably why OSM has it
>>> tagged like this.
>>> All of this highlights that while OS Locator may have a difference and
>>> is fantastic for finding potential problems, changing it so OS Locator
>>> comparisons are 100% may not be the correct solution?
>>> Any help appreciated and apologies if I should ask in a different list,
>>> surely this is an incredibly common problem that I have somehow missed the
>>> obvious solution to.
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Shaun McDonald <
>>> shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> ITO’s OSM Analysis has been updated with the latest OS Locator data.
>>>> Most places have dropped out of the 100% completeness compared to OS
>>>> Locator. There’s now 18 places which have less than 95% completeness.
>>>> Shaun McDonald
>>>> ITO World
>>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>>> www.stevenhorner.com <http://www.stevenhorner.com>
>>> @stevenhorner <http://twitter.com/stevenhorner>
>>> 0191 645 2265
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB